Words Have Meaning

THE CONSTITUTION IS MEANINGLESS TO THE LEFTIST…

Yes, I said it and stand by that statement. No, I do not mean every rank-n-file Democrat but those in Washington, DC are the Democrats and Leftist of which I refer. Likewise, the Bible is anathema to them, so it seems. Both ideological stances are troubling to me as a Christian, an American, a Vietnam Veteran, a Patriot, and someone who loves Freedom. This has been going on a long time in the DNC and is becoming more prominent and less obscure as they openly attack in direct conflict with the Constitutional guidelines they have sworn to uphold, protect, and defend.

One example is the confirmation hearings of Notre Dame Law School professor Amy Coney Barrett, whom the President has nominated for a federal appeals court slot. Senator Dick Durbin not only wrote a question regarding the nominee’s Catholicism and beliefs but then challenge her in the Senate hearing about her “orthodox” Catholicism. The Constitution expressly states that NO RELIGION, not even the orthodox liberalism of the leftist, should be a prerequisite for holding a federal office. Senator Durbin suggested the Professor Barrett would be unable to overcome her faith in exercising the duties of a federal judge. She answered Senator Durbin in writing, “Any kind of conviction, religious or otherwise, should never surpass the law.” But, that was not sufficient for Senator Durbin or his Democratic cohorts as Senator Diane Feinstein countered with, “When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws are that the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for, for years in this country.”

Dogma? Exactly what are you referring to Senator? I believe it has far less to do with her religious beliefs than the fact that she has a demonstrated record of staunchly defending the Constitution, which Senator Feinstein does not. One could presume that Senator Feinstein’s larger problem with Professor Barrett is that she clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia and therefore likely takes the Constitution very seriously. That is problematic for the Leftist Democrats. The Senator likely was disturbed that the Professor holds views considered heresy to the Leftist regarding abortion and same-sex marriage. Are those the big issues that Senator Feinstein is referring? The ever-present Senator Al Franken chimed in about speaking honorariums received from religious-liberty nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom and compared the group to the late Cambodian leader Pol Pot. He questioned her judgment. I had to laugh at that. For the Senator from Minnesota to question anyone’s judgment is cause for a deep belly laugh or a good cry.

Senator Bernie Sanders has also been in the mix in the Democrat, religious tests on all nominees. This past summer he raised religion because he was upset that Russell Vought, the nominee for Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget had written an article criticizing the platitude that everyone worships the same God. In Senator Sander’s mind that was clearly a ‘thought crime’ of the highest magnitude and cause for immediate disqualification. He expressed that Vought was an Islamophobe because he believes that the only path to salvation is Jesus Christ. He then, asked, “What about the Jews? Do they stand condemned too?” Senator Sanders only uses Jewishness when convenient and has demonstrated a lack of support and respect for the nation of Israel. I must ask, “What does religion have to do with crunching numbers in the OMB?”

I totally agree that it is important to find out if a nominee’s religious or any ideological views CONFLICT with the Constitution. However, to assert that belief that Jesus is the only path to salvation, that everyone does not worship the same God, and that the presence of Catholicism or any other religious belief is of such concern that the nominee is to be disregarded is troubling. I believe that it is the ideological view or “dogma” of the Leftist Liberal Democrats that is incredibly hostile to any and all orthodox faiths and originalist views that is the problem, not the other way around. If a person serves as a judge, they must uphold the law and if they cannot uphold the law based on their religious views they should recuse themselves from the hearing. However, holding “orthodox” religious views is not and should never be a disqualifier for holding a federal office. I realize that the religion of liberalism finds any other religion offensive but if we are going to abide by the Constitution religion neither qualifies or disqualifies. Democrats if you knew the Constitution you would drop your rhetoric and attack. Wait, you may know it but you do not believe it and want to reinterpret and revise it to accommodate your ideological position so you continue your attack. After all, it was your Party that has sought to ban God from everything government and the public.

I am concerned about the disregard for the Constitution and the growing silence of the Republicans when the Democrats launch their attacks. I am not asking that everyone believe as I do but I am asking that everyone honor and respect the Constitution. I am asking that my faith and religious convictions not be used to attempt to disqualify me from involvement. I believe that for America to survive and thrive we must honor, respect, and adhere to the Constitution. I believe that if find anything in the Constitution offensive to our convictions we should work to amend that guiding document. If a person’s religious beliefs is a qualifier or disqualifier is the absence of religious beliefs also to be a litmus test? If that is the case, then I suggest we would have no one qualified for any office. That is not practical but the Left only want those in office or positions who adhere to the Leftist Liberal Democrat ideological positions. IT IS CLEAR TO ME THE REASON THEY DO WHAT THEY DO.